INFORMATION

This website uses cookies to store information on your computer. Some of these cookies are essential to make our site work and others help us to improve by giving us some insight into how the site is being used. For further information, see our Privacy Policy. Continuing to use this website is acceptance of these cookies.

The Science of Morality

Any topic related to science can be discussed here.
Post Reply
Message
Author
User avatar
Kismet
Posts: 171
Joined: May 27th, 2012, 2:29 am

Re: The Science of Morality

#21 Post by Kismet » July 14th, 2012, 3:56 am

Latest post of the previous page:

Alan H wrote:
Kismet wrote:There's just better books; like Chopra's.
Who is the judge of it being a better book? You?
Absolutely. When it comes to the moral caliber of books like Mein Kampf and Deepak's books which have given hope to many millions of people, I think its obvious where quality resides.

As for historical/political/literary significance, well, I suppose Mein Kampf.

I judge, but I don't attack and judge, as I see many people doing.
Top
User avatar
Alan H
Posts: 24067
Joined: July 3rd, 2007, 10:26 pm

Re: The Science of Morality

#22 Post by Alan H » July 14th, 2012, 10:20 pm

Kismet wrote:
Alan H wrote:
Kismet wrote:There's just better books; like Chopra's.
Who is the judge of it being a better book? You?
Absolutely.
Why?
Alan Henness

There are three fundamental questions for anyone advocating Brexit:

1. What, precisely, are the significant and tangible benefits of leaving the EU?
2. What damage to the UK and its citizens is an acceptable price to pay for those benefits?
3. Which ruling of the ECJ is most persuasive of the need to leave its jurisdiction?
Top
User avatar
Kismet
Posts: 171
Joined: May 27th, 2012, 2:29 am

Re: The Science of Morality

#23 Post by Kismet » July 14th, 2012, 10:54 pm

Alan H wrote:Why?
Because I consider myself an astute judge of things....
Top
User avatar
Alan H
Posts: 24067
Joined: July 3rd, 2007, 10:26 pm

Re: The Science of Morality

#24 Post by Alan H » July 14th, 2012, 11:17 pm

Kismet wrote:
Alan H wrote:Why?
Because I consider myself an astute judge of things....
So do I. I should be the judge of such things...
Alan Henness

There are three fundamental questions for anyone advocating Brexit:

1. What, precisely, are the significant and tangible benefits of leaving the EU?
2. What damage to the UK and its citizens is an acceptable price to pay for those benefits?
3. Which ruling of the ECJ is most persuasive of the need to leave its jurisdiction?
Top
User avatar
Kismet
Posts: 171
Joined: May 27th, 2012, 2:29 am

Re: The Science of Morality

#25 Post by Kismet » July 15th, 2012, 11:33 pm

Alan H wrote:
Kismet wrote:
Alan H wrote:Why?
Because I consider myself an astute judge of things....
So do I. I should be the judge of such things...
Maybe you just aren't qualified.
Top
User avatar
Dave B
Posts: 17809
Joined: May 17th, 2010, 9:15 pm

Re: The Science of Morality

#26 Post by Dave B » July 16th, 2012, 10:44 am

Ah, so are "qualifications" a matter of opinion or belief or something equally subjective?

I seem to remember am aphorism from somewhere, something like, "The person who is qualified to judge is the person of true wisdom, therefore he does no judge."
"Look forward; yesterday was a lesson, if you did not learn from it you wasted it."
Me, 2015
Top
User avatar
Alan H
Posts: 24067
Joined: July 3rd, 2007, 10:26 pm

Re: The Science of Morality

#27 Post by Alan H » July 16th, 2012, 10:51 am

Kismet wrote:
Alan H wrote:
Kismet wrote:
Because I consider myself an astute judge of things....
So do I. I should be the judge of such things...
Maybe you just aren't qualified.
LOL! And I suppose you will be the first to step forward to be the judge of who is qualified?
Alan Henness

There are three fundamental questions for anyone advocating Brexit:

1. What, precisely, are the significant and tangible benefits of leaving the EU?
2. What damage to the UK and its citizens is an acceptable price to pay for those benefits?
3. Which ruling of the ECJ is most persuasive of the need to leave its jurisdiction?
Top
Post Reply

Return to “Sciences and pseudo-science”